HomeMy WebLinkAbout9.c. Airport Search Areas Land Use Regulations E%ECUTIVE SLJI�ARY FOR ACTION
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: October 2, 1990 �
A�ENDA ITEM: Airport Search Areas AGENDA SECTION:
Land Use Regulations New Business
PREPARED BY: AGENDA N E� �
Dean Johnson, Community Development Director 9 �
ATTACHMENTS: Memorandum; Resolution; APPR Y:
Proposed Met Council Regulations
Attached is a memorandum, reviewing the Metropolitan Council 's
proposed "airport search areas land use regulations. "
REC6MMENDED ACTION:
Motion to adopt A Resolution Commenting on the Progased Airport
Search Area Land Use Change Guidelines .
COUI3CIL ACTION:
Adopted resolution and directed staff to prepare resolution informing
Met Council Rosemount does not want to be considered for new airport sit .
��il O P.O. BOX 510 "
�� 2875-145TH ST. W.
O�+ey�AO,u�� ROSEMOUNT. MINNESOTA 55068
J �/'�' 612-423-4411
TO: Mayor Napper
Council Members Klassen, Oxborough, Willcox, Wippermann
City Administrator Jilk
FROM; Dean Johnson, Director of Community Development
DATE: Septeinber 26, 1990
RE: Met Council Airport Search Areas - "Land Use Guidelines"
The City Council was previously provided with copies of the above
proposed guidelines . The purposes of the guidelines are twofold:
to reduce the risk of land speculation during the new airport
search area process and to give the Metropolitan Council additional
authority to ensure against "obstructioms" in the development of an
airport.
I believe the purposes of the guidelines are appropriate if, in
fact, an airport is ever developed. The guidelines should keep the
costs of acquiring an airport site to a minimum, which is in
everyone's interest. The guidelines should also minimize land use
conflicts in and around a patential airport site.
There are two separate guidelines proposed: interim guidelines
that will affect "candidate search areas, ° and interim guidelines
that will affect the "final search area. " The candidate search
areas are expected to be approved by the .Metropolitan Council in
January, 1991 . The final search area site is expected to be
announced by June, 1991 . In other words, the guidelines for the
"candidate search areas° may be in effect for only six months.
The issues affecting local units of government regard the
Metropolitan Council ` s new authority to review and approve all
local zoning, variance, conditionai use permit and planned unit
development actions . Gities in a candidate or final search area
will now be required to submit all zoning related actions to ths
Council, prior to local implementation (in addition to all guide
plan amendments) .
Met Council's review authority in the candidate search area is
limited to the determination of consistency of the proposed action
with the local guide plan. The review authority in the final
search area is expanded to include consistency with the
"Development and Operation of a Major New Airport. ° This will
allow the review of a local zoning issue on the basis of its
consistency with a variety of airport operational criteria, such
as : distance from runways, heights of structures, environmental
buffer areas, future expansion areas, "Land Use Compatibility
Guidelines for Aircraft Noise, " and "Airport Noise Compatibility
Planning." Met Council also has the authority to review and
approve new public buildings and facilities (buildings, roads,
utilities, parks, etc. ) .
' ' October 2, 1990 City Council Meeting
Met Council Airport Search Areas
Page Two
The potential concerns for the City of Rosemount begin with the
inclusion of the City in the final search area. The potential
impacts for cities in the candidate search areas do not appear to
be serious and, if so, will be short lived. If the City is
included in a final search area, not only will the development
review process be automatically extended, the potential for eertain
development may be in total jeopardy.
I have had some discussions with Met Council staff regarding the
guidelines . I believe they are in agreement that unnecessary
restriction or delay is not in anyone's interest. The Council has
clear legislative directive and authority to establish the
guidelines; however, the specific regulations are at the Council 's
discretion. Given the fact that all or a portion of the City of
Rosemount cauld be included in the fringe of a final search area, I
offer the following comments on the guidelines :
1} Clarify whether the guidelines affect an entire community if
only a portion is in the final search area.
2) Establish a process, or reference the appropriate regulations
for a process, for a local jurisdiction to request a change
in the boundary of the final search area, or even "opt out"
of the search area.
3) Include a variance procedure to the guidelines, to alZow
reasonable exceptions to strict and literal interpretation of
the guidelines, particularly to communities that may be
located on the fringe of the final search area.
4) Bstablish an appeals process .
Attached is a Resolution, which incorporates these comments. If
the City Council wishes to submit these or other comments to the
Metropolitan Council, the deadline is October 12, 1990.
,
CITY OF ROSEMOUNT
� DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
,
� RESOLUTION 1990-
A RESOLUTION COI�II�IENTING ON THE
PROPOSED AIRPORT SEARCH AREA LAND USE
CHANGE GUIDELINES
WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Council has been authorized by the
Minnesota Legislature to prepare guidelines for reviewing land
use changes in new airport search areas; and
WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Gouncil has conducted a series of
publie hearings to receive input on the guidelines . ,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council of the City of
Rosemount offers the following comments on the proposed
guidelines :
1. Clarify whether the guidelines affect an entire community if
only a portion is in the final search area.
2 . Establish a process, or reference the appropriate regulations
for a process, for a local jurisdiction to request a change
in the boundary of the final search area, or even "opt out°
� of the search area.
� 3 . Include a variance procedure to the guidelines, to allow
.� reasonable exceptions to strict and literal interpretation of
the guidelines, particularly to communities that may be
located on the fringe_ of the final search area.
4 . Establish an appeals process .
ADOPTED this 2nd day of October, 1990 .
Vernan J. Napper, Mayor
ATTEST:
Susan M. ,7ohnson, City Clerk
Motion by: Seconded by:
Voted in favor•
Voted against:
8.07.90
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL GUIDELINES
FOR REVIEWING
LAND USE CHANGES IN NEW AIRPORT CANDIDATE SEARCH AREAS
I• INTRODUGTION
A. Purpose and Authoriry
This guide defines the pro�edures the Metropolitan Council will use in its review of
applications for changes in zoning, zoning variances, or conditional uses, including
planned unit developments, within candidate search areas for a new major airport.
Minnesota Statutes Section 473.1551 requires local governmental units within these
areas to submit applications for such changes to the Council for review and approvaL
The guide also contains the form for submission to the Council.
B. Duration of Pracedures
The candidate search area procedures apply until the Council has selected a search
area under Minnesota Statutes Section 473.155, subdivision 3.
C. Search Area Zoning
All land within a candidate search area not zoned for other use is zoned for use
� exclusively far agricultural purposes, except that a prior nonconforming use
established with reference to any lot or parcel of land may be continued.
D. Scope of Review
All applications for changes in zoning,zoning variances,or conditional uses, including
� planned unit developments, will be subject xo a maximum 90-day review by the
Council, unless the local governmental unit and the Council mutually agree to an
elctension of the 90-day period.
The Council will review an application in a candidate search area to determine
whether or not it is consistent with the comprehensive plan for the local governmental
unit adopted in accordance with Minnesota Statutes Sections 473.175 and 473.851 to
473.871, or any other authority. The local unit may not approve an application if the
Council determines it is inconsistent with the local plan.
E• Concurrent Review with Plan Amendment
If the local govemmental unit subrnits a plan amendment covering the same area as
covered in an application, the Council will review the two changes concurrently.
II. DEFINITIONS
A. Application - a written request or other proposal to a local governmental unit for a
change in zoning, a zoning variance, or a conditional use (as defined by Minnesota
Statutes Section 462.3595 for cities and Minnesota Statutes Section 394.301 for
counties), including planned unit deveiopments.
B. Candidate Search Area - the areas designated by the Metropolitan Council as
candidates for selection as a search area for a new major airport under Minnesota
Statutes Section 473.155, subdivision 3.
C. Chair - the chair of the Metropolitan CounciL
D. Commission - the Metropolitan Airports Commission.
E. Comprehensive Plan - the comprehensive plan, or its replacement, of a local
governmental unit as required by the Metropolitan Land Planning Act (Minnesota
Statutes Sections 473.851-473.871) or any other authority.
F. Comprehensive Plan Amendment - modification of a map, text, graphic or table of
a comprehensive plan required by the Metropolitan Land Planning Act or any other
authority.
G. Council - the Metropolitan CounciL
H. Final Search Area - the single area selected from the candidate search areas by the
Metropolitan Council for a new major airport under Minnesota Statutes Section
473.155, subdivision 3.
I. Local Governmental Unit - any counry, ciry, town, school district, special,district or
other political subdivisions or public corporation, other than the council or a
metropolitan agency, lying in whole or part within the metropolitan area.
J. Metropolitan Agency - the metropolitan parks and open space commission, regional
transit board,metropolitan transit commission,metropolitan waste control commission,
metropolitan airports commission and metropolitan sports facilities commission.
K Metropolitan Area - the area over which the Metropolitan Council has jurisdiction,
including only the counties of Anoka, Carver, Dakota excluding the city of Northfield,
Hennepin excluding the city of Hanover, Ramsey, Scott excluding the ciry of New
Prague, and Washington.
L: Usual and Customary - found in ordinary practice, commonly practiced.
III. PROCEDURES FOR CANDIDATE SEARCH AREAS
A. Submission. All applications for a change in zoning, zoning variance, or conditional
use, including planned unit developments, must be subrnitted by the local
2
,
governmental unit to the Metropolitan Council prior to �nal approval by the local
unit.
To e�cpedite the review process, the local unit may submit the application prior to any
- official local review.
B. Method of Submission. All applications must be accompanied by an "Information
Submission," attached hereto, and a map.
C. Initial Deterrnination of Completeness of Submission. Within 15 working days of
receipt by the Council of an application and an "Information Submissian" form,
Council staff will determine whether the"Information Submission" form is complete
and whether the application contains adequate information for the Council to conduct
its review.
The chair wi11 notify the govemmental unit of staff's determination. Failure of the
chair to do so within 15 working days of receipt of the proposed application will
constitute a finding of completeness. In notifying the governmental unit that the
"Information Submission" is incomplete, the chair will note what additional
information is needed.
Incomplete Applications. After 90 days, the Council will return all incomplete
applications to Iocal units of government for which the needed information has not
been received. A local unit of govemment may resubmit the application for Council
review.
D. Initial Determination of Levet of Review to be Conducted. Within 15 working days
of receipt by the Council of an application, the chair, on behalf of the Council and
with input from staff, will notify the governmental unit whether the Council will
invoke the 90-day review period. Failure of the chair to do so within 15 working days
will constitute a waiver of review.
If the chair determines that the application is consistent with the local government's
comprehensive plan, the Council may waive review of the application.
E• Commencement of Council Review. If the application is found to be complete upon
first submission, the 90-day review period will commence on the day the application
was received. If the application is found to be incomplete, the review period will
commence at such time as a complete application is submitted to the CounciL
F. Criteria for Determining Consistency with Comprehensive Plan. The chair will utilize
the following criteria in determining whether an application is consistent with the
lacal unit's comprehensive plan.
1• Whether the groposed change has the same use and service characteristics
� (for example, height limitations, sewering needs, transportation access) as
defined for the area in the comprehensive plan.
3
2. When the use and service characteristics are not clearly defined in the
comprehensive plan, the Council will use a definition that is usual and
custornary for the affected comprehensive plan designation.
G• Extension af Review Period. Any extension of the review period will be mutually
agreed to by the Council and the local governmental unit submitting the application.
The agreement will include a specific time period for the extension.
H. Simultaneous Review by Metropolitan Airports Commission. Upon receipt of an
application,the Council will transmit a copy to the Metropolitan Airports Commission
for comment.
After a preliminary determination that a waiver of review is warranted, the Council
will forward this determination to the Commission. The Commission will have five
working days to indicate whether it concurs with this determination. Failure to natify
the Couneil that a 90-day review is warranted will constitute concurrence with the
Council's determination.
If the Council invokes the 90-day review period, the Council will notify the
Commission of this determination. The Commission has 45 days after Council
nati�ication to comment.
L Inconsistent Application. If the Council finds an application to be inconsistent with
the local comprehensive plan, the local governmental unit may submit a plan
amendment for Council review under the "Metropolitan Council Guidelines for
Reviewing Local Comprehensive Plan Amendments." The Council will reconsider the
application concurrently with its review of the plan amendment.
J. Joint Powers Agreement for Candidate Search Areas Outside of the Metropolitan
Area. If a candidate search area includes land within a local unit of government
outside of the metrapolitan area, the Council and the local unit may enter into an
agreement for the joint exercise of powers necessary to determine whether a
proposed change in zoning, zoning variance, or conditional use will be compatible
with the development and operation of a major airport.
4
INFOP:MATION SUBMIS5ION FOR
I�AND USE CI�[ANGES IN AIRPORT SE;ARCH AREAS
This summary worksheet must be filled out and submitted to the Metropolitan Council with a
copy of each proposed application for a change in zoning, zoning variances or conditional uses,
including planned unit developments, within candidate search areas.
Please be as specific as possible; attach additional explanatory materials if necessary. If a staff
report was prepared for the Planning Commission or City Council/Town Board, please attach it as
welL
Send applicatioas to : Referrals Coordinator
Metropolitan Council
230 E. Fifth St.
S� Paul, MN 55101-1634
L GENERAL INFORMATIQN
A. Sponsoring governmental unit
Name of local contact person
Address
Telephone
Name of preparer (if different from contact person)
Date of preparation
B. Application Name
Description/Summary
C. Please attach the following:
1. Three copies of the application.
2. A cityitownship-wide map showing the location of the proposed change.
3. The current land use plan map(s), indicating the area(s} affected by the
praposed change.
4. The proposed zoning map(s), indicating the area(s) affected by the
proposed change.
D. What is the official local status of the proposed application? (Check one or more
as appropriate.)
Acted upon by planning commission on
Approved by goveming body, contingent upon Metropolitan Council review.
Considered, but not approved by governing body on
Other
II. LAND USE
A. Describe the following, as appropriate:
L Size of affected area in acres
2. Existing land use plan designation
3. Proposed zoning, zoning variance or conditional use, including planned unit
developments
atx�oxht
� i
g.07.�
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL GUIDELINES
FOR REVIEWING
LAND USE CHANGES IN NEW AIRPORT FINAL SEARCH AREA
L INTRODUCTION
A. Purpose and Authority
This guide defines the procedures the Metropolitan Council will use in its review of
� applications for changes in zoning, zoning variances, or conditional uses, including
planned unit developments, within the final search area for a new major airport. '
Minnesota Statutes Section 473.1551 requires local governmental units within this
area to submit applications for such changes to the Council for review and appravaL
The guide further defines the procedures the Council will use in its review and
� comment on new publi'c buildings or facilities, including transportation, sewer, and
park facilities, within the final search area. A governmental agency or unit may not
construct such buildings or facilities until it has submitted the plan for the building or
faciliry to the Council.
The guide also contains the forms for submission to the CounciL
B. Types of Review
The guidelines establish separate procedures for the submissian and review of land
use changes and new public buildings ar facilities within xhe final search area.
C. Duration of Procedures
The final seareh area procedures apply until ane year after the report to the
legislature on long-range airport development required by Minnesota Statutes Section
473.618.
D. Search Area Zoning
All land within the final search area not zoned for other use is zoned for use
� exclusively for agricultural purposes, except that a prior nonconforming use
established with reference to any lot or pareel of land may be continued.
E. Scope of Review
All applications for changes in zoning, zoning variances,or conditional uses,inciuding
� planned unit developments, will be subject to a maximum 90-day review by the
Council, unless the local governmental unit and the Council mutually agree to an
e�ension of the 90-day period.
The Council will review an application in the �nal search area to determine whether
or not it is consistent with the comprehensive plan for the local governmental unit
adopted in accordance with Minnesota Statutes Sections 473.175 and 473.851 to
473.871,metropolitan system plans,or the development and operation of a new major
airport in the search area. The local unit may not approve an apptication that the
Council has disapproved.
F. Concurrent Review with Plan Amendment
If the local governmental unit submits a plan amendment covering the sarne area as
covered in an application, the Council will review the two changes eoncurrently.
II. DEFINITIONS
A. Application - a written request or other proposal ta a lacal governmental unit for a
change in zoning, a zoning variance, or a conditional use (as defined by Minnesota
Statutes Section 462.3595 for cities and Minnesota Statutes Section 394.301 for
counties), including planned unit developments.
B. Chair - the chair of the Metropolitan CounciL
C. Cammission - the Metropolitan Airports Commission.
D. Comprehensive Plan - the comprehensive plan, -or its replacement, of a local
governmental unit as required by the Metropolitan Land Planning Act (Minnesata
Statutes Sections 473.851-473.871) or any other authoriry.
E. Comprehensive Plan Amendment - modification of a map, text, graphic or table of
a comprehensive plan required by the Metropolitan Land Planning Act or any other
authority.
F. Construction of a Public Building or Facility- all new construction of public buildings
or facilities, including substantial additions to existing buildings, sewer extensions and
the upgrading of existing roadways, but excluding maintenance of such buildings or
facilities.
G. Council - the Metropolitan CounciL
H. Final Search Area - the single area selected from the candidate search areas by the
Metropolitan Council for a new major airport under Minnesota Statutes Section
473.155, subdivision 3.
I. Local Gouernmental Unit - any county, city, town, school district, special district or
other political subdivisions ar public corporatian, other than the council or a
metropolitan agency, lying in whole or part within the metropolitan area.
2
J. Metropolitan Agency - the metropolitan parks and open space commission, regional
transit board,metropolitan transit commission,metropolitan waste control commission,
metropolitan airports commission and metrogolitan sports facilities commission.
K Metropolitan Area - the area over which the Metropolitan Council has jurisdiction,
including only the counties of Anoka, Carver,Dakota excluding the city of Northfield,
Hennepin excluding the ciry of Hanover, Ramsey, Scatt excluding the city of New
Prague, and Washington.
L. Metropolitan Development Guide -the comprehensive development guide prepared
by the Council to achieve the orderly and economic development of the Metropolitan
Area.
M. Metropolitan System Plans - the aviation and transportation chapters of the
Metropolitan Development Guide, and the policy plans, implementation plans and
capital budgets for metropolitan wastewater handling and treatment, transportation
and regional recreation open space.
N. Substantial - "substantial" is a relative term. It imports a considerable amount or
value in opposition to that which is inconsequential or small, something serious as
opposed to trivial, something essential, material, or fundamental.
O. Usual and Customary - found in ordinary practice; commonly practiced.
III. PROCEDURES FOR REVIEWING LAND USE CHANGES
A. Submission. Before making a final decision to approve an.application for a change
in zoning, zoning variance or conditional use, including planned unit developments,
the local governmental unit must submit it to the Metropolitan Council for review and
approval. (The local governmental unit may deny an application without review by
the Council.)
To expedite the review grocess, the local unit may submit the application prior to any
official local review.
B. Method of Submission. All applications must be accompanied by an "Information
Submission," attached hereto, and a map.
C. Initial Determination of Completeness of Submission. Within 15 working days of
receipt by the Council of an application and an "Information Submission" form,
Council staff will determine whether the "Information Submission" form is complete
and whether the application contains adequate information for the Council to conduct
its review.
The chair will notify the governmental unit of staff's determination. Failure of the
chair to do so within 15 working days of receipt of the proposed application will
constitute a finding of completeness. In notifying the governmental unit that the
3
"Information Submission" is incomplete, the chair will note what additional
information is needed.
Incomplete Applications. After 90 days, the Council wilt return all incomplete
applications to local units of government for which the needed informatian has not
been received. A local unit of government may resubmit the application for Council
review.
D. Initial Determination of I,evel of Review to be Conducted. Within 15 working days
of receipt by the Council of an application, the chair, on behalf af the Council and
with input from staff, will notify the governmental unit whether the Council will
invoke the 90-day review period. Failure of the chair to do so within 15 working days
will constitute a waiver of review.
If the chair determines that the application is consistent with the local government's
comprehensive plan, metropolitan system plans, and the development and operation
of a new major airport in the search area, the Council may waive review of the
application.
E. Commencement of Council Review. If the application is found to be complete upon
first submission, the 90-day review period will commence on the day the application
was received. If the application is found to be incomplete, xhe review period will
commence at such time as a complete application is submitted to the Council.
F. Criteria for Determining Consistency with Comprehensive Plan,Metropolitan System
Plans and the Development and Operation of a New Major Airport. 'I'he chair will
� utilize the following criteria in determining whether an application is consistent with
the local unit's comprehensive plan, metropolitan system plans and the development
and operation of a new major airport.
1. Consistency with Comprehensive Plan.
a. Whether the proposed change has the same use and service
characteristics (for example, height limitations, sewering needs,
transportation access) as defined for the area in the comprehensive
plan.
b. When the use and service characteristics are not clearly defined in the
camprehensive plan, the Council will use a definition that is usual and
customary for the affected comprehensive plan designation.
2. Consistency with Metropolitan System Plans. The criteria are the same as
those used for major plan amendments and are listed in Appendix A.
3. Consistency with the Development and Operation of a New Major Airport.
The criteria for determining consistency with the development and operation
of a new major airport will apply when the approximate location of the airport
site and the configuration of the runways, terminal and other structures for
4
the new airport are reasonably known. An application'must be consistent
with the requirements of the fotlowing:
a. � Aircraft operational areas,including runways,taxiways,parking aprons
and future expansion areas.
b• Airport facilities, including terminals, support facilities, service
facilities, environmental buffer areas and future expansion areas
c• Airport Zoning Act(Minnesota Statutes Sections 360.061-360.074 and
applicabie rules or regulations)
d. Regulation of Structure Heights (Minnesota Statutes Sections 360.81-
360.93 and applicable rules or regulations)
e• Airport Development Act (Minnesota Statutes Sections 473.636-
473.639)
f. Objects Affecting Navigable Airspace (Title 14 Code of Federal
Regulations, Part 77)
g. Land Use Compatibiliry Guidelines for Aircraft Noise (see Appendix
B) and the principles of Airport Noise Compatibiliry Planning
(Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 150)
G• Eartension of Review Period. Any extension of the review period will be mutually
agreed to by the Council and the local governmental unit submitting the application.
The agreement will include a specific time period for the extension.
H. Simultaneous Review by Metropolitan Airports Cammission. The local governmental
unit will send a copy of any application to the Metropolitan Airports Commission for
comment.
After a preliminary determination that a waiver of review is warranted, the Council
will forward this determination to the Commission. The Commission will have five
working days to indicate whether it concurs with this determination. Failure to notify
the Council that a 90-day review is wananted will constitute concunence with the
Council's determination.
If the Council invokes the 90-day review period, xhe Council will notify the
- Commission of this determination. The Commission has 45 days after Council
notification to comment.
I• Inconsistent Application. If the Council finds an application to be inconsistent with
the local comprehensive plan, the local governmental unit may submit a plan
amendment for Council review under the "Metropolitan Council Guidelines €or
Reviewing Local Comprehensive Plan Amendments." The Council will reconsider the
application concurrently with its review of the plan amendment.
S
IV. FROCEDURES FOR REVIEWING NEW PUBLIC BUILDINGS OR FACILITIES
A. Informal Comments Prior to Formal Submission. Local governmental units may
submit plans for public buildings or facilities, including transportation,sewer and park
facilities (e.g. roads, sewer lines, lift stations, ball�elds} to the Council for informal
review prior to formal submission. The purpose of informal review is to advise local
governments as early in the development process as possible on the consistency of
their plans with Council system plans and the development and operation of a new
major airport. Informal reviews will be conducted exclusively by Council staff upon
the request of the local governmental unit preparing the plans, and will be advisory
in nature.
B. Submission. All plans for public buildings or facilities,including transportation,sewer
� and park facilities, must be submitted by the local governmental unit to the
Metropolitan CounciL
All plans must be submitted prior to the start of construction.
C. Method of Submission. All plans must be accompanied by an "Information
Submission," attached hereto and a map.
D. Initial Determination of Level of Review to be Conducted. Within 10 working days
of receipt by the Council of a plan for a public building or facility, the chair, on behalf
of the Council and with input from staff, will notify the governmental unit whether
the Council will review and comment on the plan. Failure of the chair to do so
within 10 working days will constitute a waiver of review.
If the chair determines that a review is warranted, the Council will complete its review
and forward any comments to the local governmental unit within 45 days.
E. Simultaneous Review by Metropolitan Airports Commission. Upon receipt of a plan
for a public building or facility, the Council will transmit a copy to the Metropolitan
Airparts Commission for comment. The Commission has 30 days after CounciI
notification to comment and may comment to the Council or directly to the
governmental unit that submitted the plan.
6
,.,- .
, J.f-��_1�
.- .=--„
--�_- . __ _ ., -
.. ` ,-
�";'�
�-- '`..�.,�-: - _
�
� � � � � � � ,�' in-, "���-c�,�� � �
APPENDIX A 4 { (
CRITERIA FOR DETERMIIVING POTENTIAL METROPOLITAN SYSTEM IMPACT
L Whether the proposed amendment may result in a substantial change in the timing, staging
and capacity or service area of local facilities in a council-approved local sewer policy plan
or comprehensive sewer plan.
2. Whether the proposed amendment may result in a wastewater flow that substantially e�cceeds
the flow projection for the local governmental unit as indicated in the Water Resources
Management Development Guide Policy/Pian, Part I, Sewage Treatment and Handling.
3. Whether the proposed amendment may require a new national pollution discharge elimination
system permit or state disposal system permit, or a substantial change to an existing permit,
or results in the premature expansion or extension of inetropolitan service, upgrading of
treatment levels at the Metropolitan Wastewater Treatment Plant,or e�ansion of treatment
capacity.
4. Whether the proposed amendment may result in substantially less restrictive standards and
conditions to be adopted for the installation or management of private,on-site sewer facilities,
or the installation or expansian of private treatment plants than those described in the
comprehensive plan.
5. Whether the proposed amendment may have a substantial impact on the use of regional
recreation and open space facilities or natural resources within the xegional recreation open
space system. Irnpacts on the use of recreation and open space facilities include,but are not
limited to,traffic,safery,noise,visual obstructions(for example,to scenic overlooks),impaired
use of the facilities, or interference with the operation or maintenance of the facilities.
Impacts on natural resources include, but are not limited to, the impact on the level, flow, or
quality of a facility's water resources (lakes, streams, wetlands, groundwater) and impact on
a faciliry's wildlife populations or habitats (migration routes, breeding sites, plant
communities).
6. Whether the proposed amendment may preclude or substantially limit the future acquisition
of land in an area identified in the capital improvement program of the Council's Recreation
Open Space Development Guide/Policy Plan.
7. Whether the proposed amendment may substantially affect either the function of a
metropolitan airport identified in the Council's Aviation Development Guide/Policy Plan or
the land use within an airport search area.
8• Whether the proposed amendment is substantially inconsistent with the"Guidelines for Land
Use Compatibility with Aircraft Noise."contained in the Aviation Development Guide/Folicy
Plan.
7
9. Whether the proposed amendment may result in a substantial change to existing or proposed
metropolitan highways,highway interchanges,or intersections with rnetropolitan highways,or
to local roadways that have interchanges with metropolitan highways. Substantial changes to
the mainline, interchanges, and intersections include an increase in volume that will overlaad
the facility,or a difference in timing,design or location from that indicated in the Transparta-
tion Guide/Policy Plan. Changes to local roadways inciude changes in timing,staging,volume,
capacin_ design, location or functional classification.
10. Whether the proposed amendment may result in a substantial change in transit service or
facilities inconsistent with the Transportation Guide/Palicy Plan.
1 L Whether the proposed amendment may have a substantial impact on the use of solid waste
facilities identified in the Solid Waste Management Development Guide/Policy Plan. Impacts
on the use of these facilities include, but are not limited to, disruption of planned faciliry
staging, facility access, or other interference with the operation and maintenance of the
facilities.
8
APPENDIX B
LAND USE COMPATIBILITY GUIDELINES FOR AIRCRAFT NOiSE
The four aircraft noise exposure zones for major and intermediate airports can be classified as severe,
serious significant and moderate, respectively. They are described below.
NOISE EXPOSURE ZONE I
Zone 1 is immediately adjacent to the airport praperty and can be generally described as ha�ing a
severe noise problem. It is subjected to aircraft noise greater than 80 LEQ {equivalent sound leveI)
during the busiest hours of operation at MSP and 70 Ldn (level-day-night) at St. Paul Downtown.
It is an area frequently affected by both takeoff and landing operations. In addition, xhe proximiry
of the airport operating area, particularly the runway thresholds, reduces the probability of relief
resulting from future changes in the operating characteristics of either the aircraft or the airport.
Both the eausting and e�.pected noise intensiry in the area are severe and permanent. No new
development other than that dedicated to nonnoise-sensitive land uses should be considered. In
addition to preventing future noise problems, the severely noise-impac d areas sunounding MSP
should be fully evaluated to determine alternative land use strategies including eventual changes in
existing land uses.
NOISE EXPOSURE ZONE II
The noise impacts in zone II are generally sustained, especially close to the runway ends. Zone II
is exposed to aircraft noise of 75 to 80 LEQ for takeoffs and 70 LEQ for landings during the busiest
hours at MSP and between 65 and 70 Ldn at St. Paul Downtown. Based on the pro�mity of the
affected area to the airport, the seriousness of the noise e�cposure is such that sleep and speech
interference can be routinely expected. In addition, given that aircraft operations, particularly
departures, are still relatively close to the runway centerlines (extended), created noise e�osure can
be expected.
The noise intensity in this area is generally serious and oftentimes continuing. New development
should be limited to uses that have been constructed to achieve certain interior to exterior noise
attenuation and that discourage certain outdoor uses.
NOISE EXPOSURE ZONE TII _
Aircraft noise impact in zone III can also be categorized as sustaining. However, the intensity is such
that it should be considered significant, or somewhat less than serious. Zone III is expased to aircraft
noise of 70 to 75 LEQ for takeoffs and 65 to 70 LEQ for landings during the busiest hours at MSP
and 60 to 65 Ldn at St. Paul Downtown. In addition to the intensity of the noise, the location of
buildings receiving the noise must also be fully considered. Operational changes can provide some
relief for certain uses in this area.
If residential development is located outside areas that are exposed to frequent arrivals and
__ _ _.___
departures, is constructed to achieve certain interiar to e�rterior noise attenuation and is restrictive
9
as to outdoor use, it may be acceptable. Certain medical and educational facilities that involve
permanent lodging and outdoor use s�uld be discourag
NOISE EXPOSURE ZONE IV
Zone N is best described as a "gray" area where aircraft noise exposure might be considered
moderate. It is exposed to aircraft noise 65 to 70 LEQ during the busiest hours. Noise exposure is
predominantly related to takeoffs. Land uses are likely to receive the most benefit fram changes in
operations. The area is considered transitional because potential changes in airport and aircraft
operating procedures could lower noise levels.
Another factor to be considered is the ambient or background noise environmen�
Development in this area may be generally free from land use restrictions as such, but can benefit
from insulation levels above typical new construction standards in Minnesota. While such measures
may abate the level of interior noise, insulation cannot eliminate outdoor noise problems. Building
locations and site planning can help mitigate both interior and exterior noise in some cases and must
be encouraged. '—" `—
NEW DEVELOPMENT AND MAJOR REDEVELOPMENT
"New develo,pment" means a relatively large, undeveloped track of land proposed for development
(for example, a residential subdivisian, industrial park or shopping center).
"Ma'or redevelopment" means a relatively large parcel of land with old structures proposed for
extensive rehabilitation or demolition and different uses (for example, demalition of a square block
of old office and hotel buildings for new housing, of6ce, commercial uses; conversion of warehouse
to office and commercial uses).
Guidelines for land use compatibility with aircraft noise are summarized in Tables B-2 and B-3. The
guidelines apply to noise exposure zones I through IV as previously defined. An explanation of the
four ratings of land uses in the tables--consistent,provisional,conditional and inconsistent land uses--
follows:
Consistent Land uses that are acceptable.
_�
Provisional: Land uses that must comply with certain land use provisions ta be acceptable.
These provisions are described in the following section entitled "Provisionai Land Use
Requirements.°
Conditional: Land uses that may be identified as conditionally acceptable in local
comprehensive plans. The Metropolitan Council will review and authorize conditional uses
incorporated in locaY comprehensive plan amendments for compliance with the factors set
forth in the following section entitled "Conditional Land Use Review Factors."
Inconsistent: Land uses that are not acceptable even if acoustical treatment were
incorporated in the structure'and outside uses were restricted.
10
PROVISIONAL LAND USE REQUIREMENTS
Land uses that meet the following requirements are acceptable:
Structures built after December 1983 shall be acoustically constructed so as to achieve the interior
sound levels described in Table B-1.
TAble B-1
STRUCTITRE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS L
Land Use Interior Sound Level Z
Residential 45 dBA
Educational/Medical 45 dBA
Cultural/Entertainment/Recreational 50 dBA '
Office/Commercial/Retail Services 50 dBA
Industrial/Communication/Utility 60 dBA
Agricultural Land/Water/Area/
Resource Fxtraction 65 dBA
' These performance standards do not apply to buildings, accessory buildings or portions of buildings
that are not normally occupied by people (See Table B-6 for listing af standard land use coding.)
2 The naise descriptors used to delineate the noise policy zones are: MSP, one-hour LEQ, and St.
Paul Downtown, combination of annualized Ltln for Zones I, II, and III and L10 in Zone N.
' Special attention is required for certain noise sensitive uses (for example, concert halls).
Each local unit of government that has land within the airport noise zones will be responsible for
implementing and enforcing the structure performance standards (Table B-1) within its jurisdiction.
The Metropolitan Council will review the adequacy of these standards as parf of its review of
amendments to each communiry's comprehensive plan.
CONDITIONAL LAND USE REVIEW FACTORS
When a local government submits a land use plan amendment proposing the potential authorization
of uses identified as aonditional in these guidelines, the Metropolitan Council will use the following
factors in determining whether to approve the provisions relating to proposed conditional uses:
l. Specific nature of the proposed use, including extent of associated outdoor activities.
2. Relationship of proposed use to other planning considerations, including adjacent land use
activities,consistency with overall comprehensive planning and relation to other metropolitan
systems.
3. Frequency of exposure of proposed uses to aircraft overflight.
11
4. Location of proposed use relative to aircraft flightxracks and aircraft on-ground operating and
maintenance areas.
5. Location, site design and construction restrictions to be imposed by the communiry of the
groposed use with respect to reduction of exterior to interior noise transmissions and
shielding of outdoor activities.
6. Method community will use to inform future occupants of proposed building of potential
noise from aircraft operations.
7. Extent to which communiry restricts the building from having facilities for outdoor activities
associated with the use.
8. Distance of proposed use from existing or proposed runways, parallel taxiways or engine run-
up areas.
12
Table B-2
LAND USE COMPATIBILITY GUIDELINES FOR MAJOR AND INTERMEAIATE AiRPORTS,
NEW DEVELOPMENT AND MAJOR REDEVELOPMENT
NOISE EXPO5URE ZUNES
Land Use Type 1 I II III (' IV 1
Residenriat
Single/Multiplex with Individual Entrance INGOZ INCO INCO COND3
Multiplex/Apanment with Shared Entrance INCO INCO INCO COND
Mobile Home INCO INCO INCO GOND
Educatiou �nd Medical
/ Schools, Churches,'Hospitals, Nursing Homes INCO INCO WCO PROV�
Culturai, Entertainment, Recreational
Indoor COND COND COND PROV
Outdoar GOND COND C�3ND CNSTS
Oftfce, Commercial, Retail COND PROV PROV CNST: .
Services
Transportation-Passenger Facilities COND PROV PROV CNST
Transient I.odging INCO PROV PROV PROV
Other Medical, Health and Educationa( Services GOND PROV PROV CNST
Other Services COND PROV PROV CNST
Industrial, Communication,Utility PROV CNST CNST CNST
Agricuitural Land,Water Areas,Resource CNST CNST CNST CNST `�
Fatraction - _ _
Note: For infill, recanstruction and additions, even though certain land uses are generally inconsistent in a grven zone,
extenuating circuriystances could justify the project and the community should address this in its pian amendment, as
appropriate.
1 Applicabie for off-airport use only.
Z INCO means inconsistent.
3 COND means conditionaL
4 PROV means provisionaL
5 CNST means consistent.
13
, Table B-3
LAND USE COMPATIBILITY GUIDELINES FOR MAJOR Ai�iD INTERMEDIATE AIRPORTS,
INFILL DEVELUPMENT AND RECONSTRUCTION OR ApDITIONS TO EXISTING STRUCTURES
NOISE EXPOSURE ZONES
Land Use TYPeI I II III IV
Residential
Single/Multipiex with Individual Entrance CONDZ COND COND GOND
Multiplex/Apartment with Shared Entrance COND PROV3 PROV PROV
Mobile Home COND COND COND COND
Education and Medical
Schools,Churches, H�pitals, Nursing Homes COND COND COND PROV
Cultural,Entertainment, Recreational
Indoor COND PROV PROV PROV
Outdoor COND COND COND CNST°
Office, Commercial, Retail PROV PROV PROV CNST
Services
Transportation-Passenger Faciiities COND PROV PROV CNST
Transient Lodging COND PROV PROV PROV
Other Medical, Health and Educationai Services COND PROV PROV CNST
Other Services COND PROV PROV GNST
Industrial, Communication, Utility PROV CNST CNST CNST
Agricultural Land,Water Areas, Resource Extraction CNST CNST CNST CNST
Note: For infilt, reconstruction and additions, even though certain land uses are generalty inconsistent in a given zone, '
eactenuating circumstances couid jusufy the project and the community shouid address this in its plan amendment, as
aPPropriate.
1 APplicable for off-airport use oniy.
Z COND means�nditional.
3 FROV means provisionaL
° CNST means consistent. �
14
1
Table B-6
TYPICAL LAND USE BY STANDARD LAND USE CODING MANUAL GODES
Type of Land Use Gode Numbers and Specit5c Uses
Residential:
-SingieJMultiplex with Ind. Entrance 11 Househaid units
11.11 Single units-detached
11.12 Single units-semidetached
11.13 Single units-attached row
11.21 Two units-side•by-side
11.22 Two nnits-ane abave the other
-Muitiptex/Apartrr�ent with Shared 11.31 Apartments-walk up
Entrance
11.32 Apartments -elevator
12 Group quarters
13 Residential hotels
-Mobile Home 14 Mobile home parks or�urts
Educational and Medipl 65.1 Hospital, nursing homes
Schools, Churches, Nursing 68 Educational services
Homes 69.1 Retigious activities
71 Cuttural activities(including churches)
Cuitural, Entertainment,Recreational
-Indoor 72 Pubtic assembly
72.1 Auditoriums,concect hatls
- Outdoor 74 Recreational activities(incL goid courses, ciding
stables,water recreation)
75 Resorts and group camps
76 Parks
Office,Commerciat,Retail Services 52 Retail trade-building materials, hardware and farm equipment
S3 Retail trade -generai merchandise
54 Retail trade -food
55 Retaii trade-automotive, marine ccaft,aircraft and accessories
56 Retail trade -apparel and accessories
57 Retail trade - furniture,home furnishings and ec�uipment
58 Retait trade -eating and drinking establishments
59 Other retait trade
-Transportation-Passenger facilities 40 Transportation,communication and utilities
-Transient Lodging 15 Transient iodging
-Other Medical, Health and 60 Services
Educational Services
61 Finance, insurance and reai estate services
b2 Personal ssrvices
63 Business se�vices
64 Repair services
65 Professionat services
Other Services 35 Professional,scientific and controlling instruments;
photographic and optical goods;watches and ciocks
manufacturiag
15
INFOI�:MATION SUBMISSION FOR LAND USE CHANGES IN
THE FINAL AIRPORT SEARCH AREA
This summary worksheet must be filled out and submitted to the Metropolitan Council with a
copy of each proposed agplication for a change in zonin�, zoning variances flr conditional uses,
including planned unit developments, within the final search area.
Please be as speci�c as possible; attach additional explanatory materials if necessary. If a staff
report was prepared for the Planning Commission or City Council/Town Board, please attach it as
well.
Send applications to : Referrals Coordinator
Metropolitan Council
230 E. Fifth S�
S� Paul, MN 55101-1634
I. GENERAL INFORMATION
A Sponsoring governmental unit
Name of local contact person
Address
Telephone
Name of preparer (if different from contact person)
Date of preparation
B. Application Name
Description/Summary
C. Please attach the following:
l. Three copies of the application.
2. A ciry/township-wide map showing the location of the proposed change.
3. The current land use plan map(s), indicating the area(s) affected by the
proposed change.
4. The proposed zoning map(s); indicating the area(s) affected by the
proposed change.
2
D. What is the official local status of the proposed application7 (Check one or more
as appropriate.)
Acted upon by planning commission on
Approved by governing body, contingent upon Metropolitan Cauncil review.
Considered, but not approved by governing body on
Other
II. LAND USE
A. Describe the following, as appropriate:
l. Size of affected area in acres
2. Fxisting land use plan designation
3. Proposed zoning, zoning variance or conditional use, including planned unit
developments
III. METROPOLITAN SYSTEM PLANS
A. Wastewater Treatment
L Will the proposed application result in a change in the projected sewer
flows for the communiry?
No/Not Appiicable.
Yes. Indicate the expected change.
Total Year 2000/2010 flow for community
based on existing plan million gallons/day
Total 2Q00/2010 flow for communiry
based on application million gallons/day
3
B. Transportation
1. Will the proposed application result in an increase in trip generation for
the affected area?
NolNot applicable.
Yes. Describe effect.
2. Does the proposed application contain any changes to the functional
classification of roadways?
Na
Yes. Describe which roadways.
C. Aviation
Will the proposed application affect the function of a metropolitan airport or the
compatibility of land uses with aircraft noise?
No/Not applicable.
Yes. Describe effect.
D. Recreation Open Space
Will the proposed application have an impact on existing or future federal, state or
regional recreational facilities?
Na/Not applicable.
Yes. Describe effect.
��ro�,2
INFOA;MATION SUBMISSION FOR
PUBLIC BUILDING/F'ACILITY PLANS
IN THE FINAL AIRPORT SEARC�-I A,REA
This summary worksheet must be filled out and submitted to the Metropolitan Council with a
copy of the proposed public building or facility, including transportation, sewer and park facilities,
within the final airport search area.
Please be as specific as possible; attach additional explanatory materials if necessary. If a staff
repart was prepared for the Planning Commission or Ciry Council/Town Board, please attach it as
well.
Send plans to : Referrals Coordinator
Metropolitan Council
230 E. Fifth S�
S� Paul, MN 55141-1634
I. GENERAL INFORMATION
A. Sponsoring governmental unit
Name of local contact persan
Address
Telephone
Name of preparer (if different from contact person)
Date of preparation
B. Praject Name
Description/Summary
C. Please attach the following:
1. Three copies of the plans.
2. A city/township-wide map showing the location of the proposed
building/facility.
D. What•is the official local status of the proposed buiiding/facility? (Check one or
more as appropriate.)
Approved by governing body, contingent upon Metropolitan Council review.
Considered, but not approved by goveming body on '
Other
II. CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE
Indicate the current construction schedule below, including bid letting and ground
breaking.
aidorm3
8.&90